Volume : 7, Issue : 7, JUL 2021

IMPROVEMENT OF TECHNOLOGY IN IMPROVING MARKETING SYSTEM

DR. R. RATHIDEVI

Abstract

In contemporary situation, administration, information communication technology is playing vital and significant role in terms of strengthening, integrating and addressing various social, political, economical and other consumer issues. In many ways it has been addressing and redressing all social, economical and political issues of the various communities and citizens, unless information communication technology has been introduced nothing development would have occurred in the Indian society as well as western society. Through this aspects how fare information communication technology is helping and addressing consumers oriented issues without failure because, many cases are received and inducted trough communication technology for resolve and address in short span of times. This study is aimed at analysis of role and play of the information and communication technology in resolving and redressing consumers and customers issues and problems. As it is increasing benefits, gains and success to costumers, additionally it brings consumers problems through information communication technology because Consumers have been receiving and getting so many doubts, ambiguity and suspicions in delivered customers services, goods and materials, regarding to this what extend information communication technology is helping to customers and consumers would be major concern of this study. Many of online shopping is cheating the consumer’s money and delivering adulterate, filthy materials against to its mentioned details of fees and procedures.

Keywords

SOCIAL SECURITY, SAFETY, CUSTOMERS BENEFITS, TECHNOLOGY ROLE.

Article : Download PDF

Cite This Article

Article No : 4

Number of Downloads : 44

References

  1. Agarwal, S., D. Aaronson, and E. French. 2008. The Spending and Debt Responses to Minimum WageIncreases. Available:https://editorialexpress.com/cgi-bin/conference/download.cgi?db_name=SED2008&paper_id=379.
  2. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. 2012. Medical Expenditure Panel Survey: Survey Background. Available:http://meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb/about_meps/survey_back.jsp.
  3. Antin, J., and E.F. Churchill. 2011. Badges in Social Media: A Social Psychological Perspective. Presentation at the Gamification Summit, July, Chicago, IL.
  4. Archibald, R., and R. Gillingham. 1980. An analysis of the short-run consumer demand for gasoline using household survey data. The Review of Economics and Statistics 62 (4):622–628.
  5. Archibald, R., and R. Gillingham. 1981. The distributional impact of alternative gasoline conservation policies. The Bell Journal of Economics 12 (2):426–444.
  6. Attanasio, O.P., and S.J. Davis. 1996. Relative wage movements and the distribution of consumption. Journal of Political Economy 104 (6):1,227–1,262.
  7. Attanasio, O.P., and G. Weber. 1995. Is consumption growth consistent with inter temporal optimization? Evidence from the Consumer Expenditure Survey. Journal of Political Economy 103 (6):1,121–1,157.
  8. Athanasius, O.P., J. Banks, C. Meghir, and G. Weber. 1999. Humps and bumps in lifetime consumption. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics 17 (1):22–35.
  9. Attanasio, O.P., E. Battistin, and A. Leicester. 2006. From Micro to Macro, from Poor to Rich: Consumption and Income in the U.K. and the U.S. Presentation at the Conference of the National Poverty Center on Consumption, Income, and the Well-Being of Families and Children, Washington, DC, May 4–5.
  10. Attanasio, O.P., E. Battistin, and M. Padula. 2010. Inequality in Living Standards since 1980: Evidence from Expenditure Data. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.
  11. Aune, D. 2011. Agricultural Resource Management Survey: Integrating Varied Data Needs into a Single Data Collection. Presentation at the Household Survey Producers Workshop, June 1–2, Committee on National Statistics, National Research Council, Washington, DC. Available:http://www.bls.gov/cex/hhsrvywrkshp_aune.pdf.
  1. Bailey, J. 2011. Nielsen Life360 Approach. Presentation at the Household Survey Producers Workshop, June 1–2, Committee on National Statistics, National Research Council, Washington, DC. Available:http://www.bls.gov/cex/hhsrvywrkshp_bailey.pdf.
  2. Balakrishnan, P.V., S.K. Chawla, M.F. Smith, and B.P. Micholski. 1992. Mail survey response rates using a lottery prize giveaway incentive. Journal of Direct Marketing 6:54–59.
  3. Banks, J., R. Blundell, and S. Tanner. 1998. Is there a retirement-savings puzzle? The American Economic Review 88 (4):769–788.
  4. Barrett, G., P. Levell, and K. Milligan. 2012. A Comparison of Micro and Macro Expenditure Measures across Countries Using Differing Survey Methods. Paper prepared for the Conference on Improving the Measurement of Consumer Expenditures, sponsored by the Conference on Research in Income and Wealth and the National Bureau of Economic Research, December 2011. Available:http://www.nber.org/chapters/c12665.pdf.
  5. Battistin, E. 2003. Errors in Survey Reports of Consumption Expenditures. Working Paper No. 0307. London, England: Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  6. Beatty, P. 2010. Considerations Regarding the Use of Global Survey Questions. Presentation at the Consumer Expenditures Survey Methods Workshop, December 8–9, Suitland, MD.Available:http://www.bls.gov/cex/methwrkshp_pap_beatty.pdf.
  1. Beaule, A., and F. Stafford. 2011. Applying Event History Methods in a National Panel: The Design and Use of Event History Calendars in the Panel Study of Income Dynamics. Presentation at the Household Survey Producers Workshop, June 1–2, Committee on National Statistics, National Research Council, Washington, DC.Available:http://www.bls.gov/cex/hhsrvywrkshp_stafford.pdf.
  1. Bee, A., B.D. Meyer, and J.X. Sullivan. 2012. The Validity of Consumption Data: Are the Consumer Expenditure Interview and Diary Surveys Informative? NBER Working Paper No. 18308. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.Available:http://www.nber.org/papers/w18308.pdf?new_window=.
  2. Bensky, N., A.T. Burks, T. Yancey, C. Shuttles, and M. Link. 2010. Contingent Incentives Effects on Survey Response. Presentation at the American Association for Public Opinion Research Sixty-Fifth Annual Conferences, May 13–16, Chicago, IL.
  3. Bernheim, D., J. Skinner, and S. Weinberg. 2001. What accounts for the variation in retirement wealth among U.S. households? American Economic Review 91 (4):832–857.